W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > April 2016

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

From: Barry Norton <barrynorton@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 14:25:05 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMSTHC9_KxxzJWNywo_cKUCw7WjF-ZeMTFCQLnQxE=OyPeovLQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Hugh Glaser <hugh@glasers.org>
Cc: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>, Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>, SW-forum <semantic-web@w3.org>
Is that transitive? Like in the Christian trinity...



On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Hugh Glaser <hugh@glasers.org> wrote:

> And would we also have owl:differentDifferentButSame?
>
> The built-in OWL property owl:differentDifferentButSame links things to
> things. Such an owl:differentDifferentButSame statement indicates that two
> URI references actually refer to different things but may be the same under
> some circumstances.
>
> > On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> wrote:
> >
> > There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at
> this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
> >
> > The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a
> massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
> >
> > I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
> define it along the lines of:
> >
> >
> > The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to
> things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
> >
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> > [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> > [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
> >
> > -Sarven
> > http://csarven.ca/#i
> >
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 1 April 2016 13:25:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 1 April 2016 13:25:55 UTC